Category: Benefits

Fay, Regina (on the Application of) v Essex County Council: Admn 26 Apr 2004

Judges:

Charles J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 879 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

National Assistance Act 1948 29

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Spink, Regina (on the Application Of) v Wandsworth Borough Council Admn 20-Oct-2004
Parents requested the local authority to make provision for their severely disabled children. The local authority wished when deciding whether to provide adaptations of the house to make allowance for the parents’ financial resources.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.196101

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v AS (CA) (Other Current Benefits, Residence and Presence Conditions): UTAA 4 Feb 2021

Can a person who would otherwise be a ‘person subject to immigration control’ under Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, s 115(9) rely on the provisions of SI 2000/636 which exempt a member of a family of a national of a state which is a party to the Oporto Agreement on the European Economic Area if the national has not exercised freedom of movement rights? CDLA/708/2007 followed, on additional grounds. JFP v Department for Social Development (DLA) [2012] NiCom 267 not followed.

Citations:

[2021] UKUT 24 (AAC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits, Immigration, European

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.659501

Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council v Salisbury Independent Living Ltd: CA 9 Feb 2012

The court was asked whether a landlord (or, perhaps, some landlords) can exercise an independent right of appeal to the First Tier Tribunal against a decision of the Local Authority as to the payment of housing benefit, other than in the cases for which specific provision is made by the subordinate legislation.

Judges:

Maurice Kay, Hughes, Lewison LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 84

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.450997

Regina (Barber) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: Admn 17 Jul 2002

The claimant challenged the refusal of the respondent, under authority of the regulations, to divide payment of child benefit between himself and his former partner. The child stayed with both parents. Other benefits flowed from the allocation of the benefit to one parent. He alleged that this was discriminatory under the Convention.
Held: The challenge to the Regulations failed. The purpose of the Regulation was to ensure payment of the benefit to someone with care of the child. The regulation could not be construed so as to allow the benefit to be split. It was not discrimination, since the detriment, such as it was, was applied across the range of potential beneficiaries, and there was insufficient evidence for the court to consider a claim of indirect sex discrimination.

Judges:

Sir Richard Tucker

Citations:

[2002] 2 FLR 1181, Times 29-Aug-2002, Gazette 19-Sep-2002, [2002] EWHC 1915 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security (Claims and Payments) Regulations 1987 (SI 1987 No 1968) 34, European Convention on Human Rights 8 14, Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 144

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Hockenjos v Secretary of State for Social Security (No 2) CA 21-Dec-2004
The claimant shared child care with his former partner, but claimed that the system which gave the job-seeker’s child care supplement to one party only was discriminatory.
Held: In such cases the supplement usually went to the mother, and this . .
Cited – Humphreys v Revenue and Customs SC 16-May-2012
Separated parents shared the care of their child. The father complained that all the Child Tax Credit was given to the mother.
Held: The appeal failed. Although the rule does happen to be indirectly discriminatory against fathers, the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Human Rights

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.174754

Bibi v Chief Adjudication Officer: CA 25 Jun 1997

A widow from a polygamous marriage is not entitled to the widowed mother’s allowance, despite the payment of national insurance contributions by the deceased father. There must have been a valid English marriage, according to the lex loci.

Citations:

Times 10-Jul-1997, Gazette 09-Jul-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 1957

Statutes:

Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 37

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Chief Adjudication Officer v Bath CA 28-Oct-1999
The claimant and her husband had been married at a Sikh temple, and lived together for many years before his death. The temple had not been accredited for marriages, and the Secretary of State resisted payment of benefits to the claimant as a widow, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Family

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.142353

Partena Asbl v Les Tartes De Chaumont-Gistoux Sa: ECJ 27 Sep 2012

ECJ Social security for migrant workers – Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 – Articles 13 and 14c – Legislation applicable – Self-employed persons – Social security scheme – Insurance – Person employed or unemployed in a Member State – Self-employed activity in another Member State – Company agent – Residence in a Member State other than the State where the company has its registered office – Management of the company from the State of residence – National legislation establishing an irrebuttable presumption of pursuing a professional activity as a self-employed person in the Member State where the company has its registered office – Obligatory insurance with that State’s social security scheme for self-employed persons

Judges:

J-C Bonichot P

Citations:

C-137/11, [2012] EUECJ C-137/11

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71

Jurisdiction:

European

Benefits

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.464587

Caves Krier Freres SArL v Directeur De L’Administration De L’Emploi: ECJ 27 Sep 2012

ECJ Opinion – Freedom of movement for workers – Articles 21 and 45 TFEU – National legislation – Reimbursement by a Member State of social security contributions to employers that recruit unemployed workers aged 45 and over who register with the competent authorities in that State – Restriction – Justification

Judges:

Sharpston AG

Citations:

C-379/11, [2012] EUECJ C-379/11

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Benefits

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.464580